[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201010211823.38287.vapier@gentoo.org>
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 18:23:37 -0400
From: Mike Frysinger <vapier@...too.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Luca Barbieri <luca@...a-barbieri.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lib/atomic64_test: do not build on non-atomic64 systems
On Thursday, October 21, 2010 18:02:50 Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Oct 2010 13:27:15 -0400 Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > If the arch doesn't provide atomic64 functionality (there are quite a
> > few), then don't bother trying to build this test.
>
> I don't get it. If the arch doesn't implement atomic64 then this file
> will get zillions of build errors, won't it?
... which is why i added the ifdef protection
> > diff --git a/lib/atomic64_test.c b/lib/atomic64_test.c
> > index 250ed11..0ac1a66 100644
> > --- a/lib/atomic64_test.c
> > +++ b/lib/atomic64_test.c
> > @@ -12,6 +12,8 @@
> >
> > #include <linux/kernel.h>
> > #include <asm/atomic.h>
> >
> > +#ifdef ATOMIC64_INIT
>
> hm, that's a bit lazy. It should really use a CONFIG_HAVE_ thing. What
> a pita.
ATOMIC64_INIT is required for atomic64 headers to provide, and having a
Kconfig knob doesnt gain anything else
-mike
Download attachment "signature.asc " of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists